Promoting School Based Cohorts in Distance/Online Learning

doi:10.4236/ce.2013.48A003

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Creative Education

2013. Vol.4, No.8A, 9-11

Published Online August 2013 in SciRes (http://www.scirp.org/journal/ce) http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2013.48A003

Promoting School Based Cohorts in

Distance/Online Learning

Janis McKinley, D. J. Champagne

Park University School for Education, Parkville, Missouri

Email: [email protected]du, [email protected]

Received June 18th, 2013; revised J uly 18th, 2013; accepted July 25th, 2013

tive Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any me-

dium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Successful cohort online learning requires three important components: Community, Collaboration, and

Content. Looking at how to develop these components is discussed as a result of what is known by the

authors’ active engaging in the cohort online learning model.

Keywords: Cohort; Online Learning Model; 3 C’s; Community; Collaboration; Content

Introduction

Online courses can be “just online courses”. What makes a

good, special, purposeful class? Our role with the “new class-

room” is to help the student make sense of complexity by con-

densing the new style for learning into two or three critical

goals. One such goal is that of forming a supportive learning

community within the distance/online learning, what we refer

to as a cohort. It is our intention to share a focus on three com-

ponents necessary for student success specifically aligned with

Park University’s distance learning philosophy. These compo-

nents are Community, Collaboration, and Content (McKinley &

Champagne, 2013). This discussion will elaborate on these

three components and share both definitions of explanations for

what we have found to be necessary in a successful Cohort

model for learning.

Cohort

A cohort can be defined as a group of students treated as a

single degree, program-seeking group. Cohorts typically share a

professional identity and frequently teach within the same Dis-

trict (for the purposes of Educational Leadership and Teacher

Leadership graduate degree programs). Cohorts are specifically

recruited as a learning community throughout their program of

study, working together to accomplish the same goal—degree

completion. This definition embodies the early beliefs devel-

oped by Barnett and Muse (1993), describing the cohort as a

group of students who begin and complete a program of studies

together, engaging in a common set of courses, activities and/or

learning experiences (p. 401). While we are developing cohorts

for professional educators, it is clear that the cohort system is

applicable to any lik e -minded degree candidat es.

Research on cohort-based online learning has found the in-

tentionally unified group of learners provides emotional and

academic support to and for each member. This quality of sup-

port is directly linked to both motivation from and encourage-

ment to persevere from the members. Findings show online

discussion has the potential to increase critical thinking skills,

leading to activity success. This quality is found to increase

member satisfaction and reduce attrition (Lamb, Johnson, &

Smith, 1999-2010). Fisher and Baird’s (2005) study found on-

line learning, when connectedness and a sense of community

among peers and instructor are established, positively influ-

enced retention. A study conducted by Dietz-Uhler, Fisher and

Han (2007) also showed retention rates lower in long distance

online classes when compared with face-to-face classes. Bar-

nard, Paton, and Lan (2008) found peer approval, in the online

community, was valued and students wanted to be accepted by

the member s.

The 3 C’s

Community

A benefit for cohort learning lies in establishing a sense of

community. Community is a necessary element for cohort suc-

cess. Community has a necessary quality of cohesiveness rec-

ognized and acknowledged by all cohort members. We believe

a secure start when engaging in the first online-class is vital to

developing this sense of cohesiveness. The idea “we are in this

together” must be developed in the introduction to the class

online platform. At Park University, personal introductions are

a part of each Course Home. A guideline (rubric) for personal

introduction is provided to encourage a presentation of each

unique member involved in the learning community. Although

a recruiting attempt is made for professionals already ac-

quainted to one another to form a cohort, frequently cohorts

develop online to which no one person may ever meet Face 2

Face (F2F). These introductions and sometimes pictures pro-

vide a commonality of purpose to group cohesiveness.

The Course Home contains information for what we believe

to be necessary elements for success. We have discussed the

introduction activity and the importance these statements play

in cohesive relationship building. The syllabus and an explana-

tion of how to navigate through the pieces/sections of the online

J. MCKINLEY, D. J. CHAMPAGNE

course are necessary pieces for a secure start. Netiquette is a

clearly established outline of communication etiquette expected

as a part of the policy for all online communication. The course

developer provides clear explanations of procedures and ex-

pectations with a course outline and rubrics for assessment of

activities including communication in the weekly discussion

threads—reinforcing netiquette. Positive support from the in-

structor helps to determine positive support between members,

establishing a sense of togetherness and commitment.

Communication is an element critical to establishing com-

munity in cohort learning. The typed word must convey pur-

poseful meaning to the other learners. No body language, no

ability for instantaneous elaboration—unless writing in a Chat

Room—makes online learning unique. The student must type

what they mean AND mean what they say. Decoding by the

reader can lend itself to interesting dialog strands within a dis-

cussion thread. Diligence, dedication, and the ability to edit and

elaborate the words/language are keys to successful communi-

cation and thus the ability to maintain cohort cohesiveness

(Jones, 2010). It is important the instructor use precise guide-

lines for participation or student’s will not be as involved as

they should be. It remains an important role of the instructor to

reinforce and revisit those expectations through discussion

threads.

Collaboration

Establishing the process for collaboration for online learning

is the quality necessary for cohort success. When we promote

cohort development with Districts or other degree-similar on-

line learners we stress the importance of collaboration. Col-

laboration involves interactions with others, including peer to

peer, student to faculty, and student to content. Collaboration

needs structure in expectations and the use of rubrics. The in-

structor needs to use flexibility in order to listen to students and

use good judgment in initiating elaboration of content items for

clarity or changes in deadlines, as an example, to promote stu-

dents success. Family emergencies, work duties, or computer

problems can present unexpected interruptions in a student’s

ability to meet deadlines. Collaboration involves each member

participating in the exchange of ideas and problem solving.

Team development is suggested with each member being re-

sponsible for their on learning as well as the work of teammates

(Lamb et al., 1999).

Communication that is collaborative and continual must be

afforded to the cohort online model for learning. The rules for

communication, having been initially established, will include

consequences. Teaching and communicating in the classroom

platform is a requisite. Avoiding private e-mails for questions

and problems must be promoted by and for all class members.

The instructor can determine the quality of cohesiveness in the

learning community by how much support is visible in course

talk; e.g. peer editing, APA format sharing, or calling a member

out for lack of participation in the form of a “Welcome back

X··· I have missed your critical dialog··· discussion thread is

not the same without you!”

There are several benefits to cohort development and the re-

sulting collaboration during the learning process. Collaboration

among members provides a platform for exchanging ideas and

personal philosophies. The affects of supportive, qua-

si-mediated online interaction encourages continued participa-

tion through shared knowledge. Each participant is an expert in

one or many best-practices. We have learned engagement, in

the learning platform, must be clearly communicated to stu-

dents along with a discussion rubric to ensure reflective re-

sponse contributions. Collaboration in discussion thread activi-

ties has a schedule for original posting and required response to

others. Collegiality cannot be assumed; rather it must be spe-

cifically encouraged by the quality instructor promoting en-

gagement.

Sharing techniques and methods will encourage personal and

professional skill growth. As an example, a student writes an

original post, and through collaborative discussion develops a

final outcome of an educational philosophy in a required activ-

ity. Kindergarten teacher, D. W. (2013) wrote as a final per-

sonal philosophy statement “··· I do not follow any one par-

ticular education theory but combine ideas from many leaders

in the field to develop a philosophy that best suits the needs of

my particular group of learners ···” D. W. then provided spe-

cifics with descriptions/explanations of those best practices

embedded in her personal philosophy of education. These post-

ings in the weekly discussion threads of the online class pro-

vides an original post from which students receive feedback

from peers encouraging continued critical thinking in the de-

velopment of required activities for these “School Leader” can-

didates.

Content

Content of the online course is the third major component to

be discussed. The content of each degree program provides for

rigorous and relevant learning. The core learning objectives and

outcomes are developed from professional standards appropri-

ate to each degree program at Park University. In the graduate

School for Education these standards are provided through the

Missouri Standards for the Preparation of Educators (MoSPE),

Interstate School Leader Licensure Consortium Standards

(ISLLC), and the National Board for Professional Teaching

Standards (NBPTS). Learning outcomes must be clearly identi-

fied and state what students must know and be able to do.

These learning outcomes are established through professional

licensing standards and are reflected explicitly in course learn-

ing outcomes. All online activities should be aligned with the

course objectives and core learning outcomes. Assessment is

necessary to show whether students learned the intended objec-

tives.

Content is directly manipulated by the professor in the online

classroom. In order for cohesiveness to be developed with co-

hort groups, the professor must communicate the purpose for

study and the expectations guiding the study. As facilitator, the

instructor should summarize important points and ideas, as well

as provide a model linking theory to practice. They should en-

courage students to do the same by having critical discussions

which challenge thinking and problem-solving. Specific and

immediate feedback on individual and group assignments

should be provided. In order to teach online courses, Park Uni-

versity requires successful completion of online-training for

instructors through their own online learning in ED750 BOOT

CAMP. Quality of instruction is a key to both accreditation and

for cohort success. Instructors are given continued support at

Park University with various links on the Park website. Support

can be in the form of reviewing the course home, how to set up

grading, designing introductions, lectures, assignments, exams,

etc. There is also a forum for instructors to connect to each

other to share strategies, thoughts, and other needs.

J. MCKINLEY, D. J. CHAMPAGNE

A cohort is as successful as each individual member is suc-

cessful. All activities are based upon key learning ingredi-

ents—communication, respect, and commitment. Students can

be as actively engaged as much or more so in online learning

classes, as opposed to F2F classes. More engagement in learn-

ing generally means more motivation and improvements in the

thinking process (Barkley, 2010). Students can work in various

group formats, as well as individually. Students can be in

charge of asking questions to their peers on the discussion

threads. Assignments and grades can be individual as well as

group oriented. Pairing students can be used to review each

other’s papers. Each group member can have a specific role in

the assignment, e.g., to summarize, research, encourage, and/or

serve as recorder in order that each participant makes a sub-

stantive contribution.

Learning strategies including probing questions, the one-

minute paper, the clearest/muddiest point of the lesson, jig-saw

of an article, think-pair-share, and a daily journal can be used

with online learning. Students can be divided into two groups

and debate two sides of an issue. Case-studies of real-life situa-

tions can be easily discussed (McKinley & Choi, 2013). Stu-

dents participating in active, engaging classes report not feeling

alone. They feel part of a community as they collaborate with

others in rich, meaningful content (Online teacher evaluation,

2012).

Respect for each member must become a habit—“We are

what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a

habit”··· Aristotle.

Respect wil l become the rules of engageme nt for all commu-

nication in the class platform between peers/colleagues and

student and instructor. Respect is a necessary but not sufficient

element for commitment to the cohort online learning model.

We believe that commitment follows respect.

Self-discipline for continued communication and engage-

ment must be a trait possessed by each member. We believe

this trait will be successfully reinforced with respectful en-

gagement by all members of the cohort learning community.

This communication and engagement by the instructor includes

answering student concerns in a timely manner—Park policy

requires at least 4 contact days per week, including weekends

and in a timely manner within 24 and no more than 48 hours.

Self-discovery—insight—by students must be facilitated as a

best-practice by the instructor (DeFour, 2004).

Conclusion

In closing, the three areas of Community, Collaboration, and

Content are necessary components for successful cohort online

learning. The team concept must be embraced by cohort mem-

bers. The university/college has a responsibility for developing

standards-based core learning outcomes. The instructor guides

learning by facilitating teaching and learning strategies. He/she

is responsible for students’ success. However, each student has

an individual responsibility to their own learning and to the

cohort “team” for outcomes-based achievement. This is what

makes a purposeful cohort online learning model.

REFERENCES

Anonymous. (2013). Teacher evaluation comments. ED608 Assess-

ment.

Barkley, E. (2010). Student engagement techniques. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

Barnard, L., Patron, V., & Lan, W. (2008). Online self-regulatory learn-

ing behaviors as a mediator in the relationship between online per-

ceptions with achievement. International Review of Research in

Open & Distance Learning, 9, 1-11.

Barnett, B., & Muse, I. (1993). Cohort groups in educational admini-

stration: Promises and challenges. Journal of School Leadership, 3,

400-415.

D. W. (2013). Posted educational philosophy, kindergarten teacher

comments. ED608 Assessment.

Dietz-Uhler, B., Fisher, A. , & Han, A. (2007). Designing on l in e c o u rses

to promote student retention. Journal of Educational Technology

Systems, 36, 105-112. doi:10.2190/ET.36.1.g

DuFour, R. (2004). What is a professional learning community?

Educational Leadership, 61, 6-11.

Fisher, M., & Baird, D. E. (2005). Online learning design that fosters

student support, self-regulation and retention. Campus-Wide Infor-

mation Systems, 22, 88-107. doi:10.1108/10650740510587100

Jones, V. R. (2010). Essentials for engaged 21st century learners. Tech-

niques. In V. A. Marcinkowski, & L. Rehring (Eds.), The secondary

school report: A final report on the development, pilot testing, vali-

dation, and field testing of the secondary school environmental liter-

acy assessment instrument. Cincinnati, Ohio: Office of Research and

Development, US EPA.

Lamb, A., Johnson, L., & Smith, W. (1999). Teaching and learning at a

distance.

http://eduscapes.com/distance/community_collaboration/cohort_grou

ps.htm

McKinley, J., & Champagne, D. J. (2013). “Promoting School-Based

Cohorts in Distance Online Learning” at Missouri Association of

Colleges for Teacher Education (MACTE) Spring Conference. Co-

lumbia: MO.

McKinley, J., & Choi, D. H. (2013). KC Professional Development

Council; Enhanced Teaching and Learning Conference. Kansas City:

MO.